Jump to content

CDAK

Full Members
  • Posts

    385
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by CDAK

  1. This is what you said:

     

    "If they're exercising them because they think "I could NEVER be convicted".....then yeah, it's not just arrogance and entitlement, it's arrogance and entitlement so grand that it overrides reason and logic." 

    Thus, in your opinion, it's arrogant and entitled to exercise your due process rights (that's what "them" refers to in your quote) depending on your motivations.  In my opinion, it's never arrogant or entitled to exercise your due process rights.  

  2. 8 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

    Basically, if she had taken either of the plea deals, then she'd know exactly what she'd get as far as a prison sentence and conviction.

    By doing this, she's rolling the dice. And note, as others have mentioned, that the dice are really unfriendly when you're dealing with federal prosecutors. This is putting everything on 13 at the roulette table.

    This isn't going to be like the OJ trial, where a couple of local government bumpkins were suddenly thrust into the limelight by a national star's case. The stars are on the prosecution's side, and they already have the case buttoned up. She will get convicted, and of everything the prosecution decides to get her convicted of. The difference is, now she doesn't know what the sentence will be. It will probably be a worse sentence, because prosecutors generally give lighter sentences to those who don't fight the charges.

    Maybe she's making an unwise decision.  I don't know.  And I won't dispute it if anyone criticizes her potentially unwise decision.  I object to calling her arrogant and entitled for exercising her due process rights.

  3. 1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

    We all have rights.  We have a right to tell a cop "why don't you fuckin' make me?"  Just because you have a right doesn't mean that exercising it is wise.

    Lots of very, very smart and experienced criminal defense attorneys advise their clients "look, I know you have a right to a trial, and to make the government put on their evidence....but I've SEEN their evidence.  If you do that, you'll be convicted, and go away for 20 years.  My advice is that you waive your right to trial, and take the 2 year deal they are offering."

    Having a right is one thing.

    Exercising/not exercising it intelligently is another.

    What does that have to do with being arrogant and entitled?  You said, if her motivations for rejecting a plea deal are X, that's "arrogance and entitlement so grand that it overrides reason and logic."  Now you're asserting that she may not have been "intelligent[]" in rejecting a plea deal.  Your arguments are inconsistent and all over the map.

    I don't think any criminal defendant is arrogant or entitled for exercising their due process rights.  But of course, it's not always the intelligent decision to request a jury trial.  Those are two very different ideas (i.e., arrogant and entitled vs. an unwise decision).  

    • Like 2
  4. 1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

    If they're exercising them because they think "I could NEVER be convicted".....then yeah, it's not just arrogance and entitlement, it's arrogance and entitlement so grand that it overrides reason and logic.  Which is a thing that actually happens.

    I'm sure I'll disagree but I don't know what distinction you're trying to draw.  What are the acceptable motivations for exercising your due process rights?  And are there any other unacceptable motivations for exercising due process rights?

  5. 4 hours ago, CHEF DIESEL said:

    93-95% conviction rate for federal prosecutors for the last several years 2012-2017. Should have taken a deal.

    I was ambivalent about them at first, but this level of arrogance, contempt and entitlement really needs to be punished with prison time.

    Here's some free advice to these two painfully stupid mooks: Fire your lawyers and plead guilty. 

    It's arrogant and entitled to exercise your due process rights including a jury trial?  The guilty have due process rights.  They aren't entitled or arrogant if they exercise those rights rather than pleading guilty.

  6. 8 hours ago, SquishMitten said:

    So it’s basically a loan that you pay back based on your income. Gubment loans have a pretty similar option. Not all that revolutionary. 

     

    1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

    So it's a loan with more favorable terms for students in majors that are likely to generate higher income?  Seems reasonable.  The "don't pay while you're unemployed" aspect is a nice hedge for the student, but I bet there's a ton of fine print on that one.

    I don't think it's a loan.  It's an equity stake.  The equity stake could be worth $0 in 10 years or potentially could be worth a few billion.  The investor invests cash in exchange for a percent of future earnings.  But there is no principal or interest or any of the characteristics of a traditional loan.  

  7. 31 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

    The only reason any of this makes any sense is that poors and browns get worse for the same or less every day.  That's appalling.

    Poors and browns get worse [sentences] for the same [bribing their way into college] or less [half bribes?] every day?  It seems like that should be part of the storylines (i.e., that poors and browns are also bribing exam proctors and college coaches and admission counselors and receiving harsher sentences on a daily basis).  Media is really missing a big part of the story.

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  8. Look at the explanation in the article I posted above.  The betting line was approximately 4.5 points different when Durant was in vs when he was out.  The Thunder (I know the article is a couple years old) were 29-35-1 ATS with Durant out.  And the Thunder were 56-57-4 ATS with Durant in.  So they were close to the same against the spread, regardless of whether he was in or out.  That shows that the 4.5 point difference was accurate.

  9. Yes, correct (understanding that I'm basing that assertion on betting lines).  I would note, if you read the article I linked, that some folks had Durant slight higher and worth 4-4.5 points.  Below is an explanation from the site.  In any event, the overarching point is that Owens is significant but no way is he worth 10 points, particularly when the O/U is 118, which is well well below most NBA games.

     

    I have Durant worth four to 4.5 points to the point spread and Dave Mason from BetOnline told me he has Durant valued at 3.5 to four points. 

    When our OddsShark numbers came back, we found those numbers made sense. Here are the average OKC point spreads with Durant in and out of the lineup over the past two seasons: 

    OUT: -1.54
    IN: -5.88 (missed 65 games) 

    So we’re looking at around a tangible 4.5 points to the spread. Even with the bigger numbers OKC proved to be a better bet with KD on the court. 

    With Durant out of the lineup the last two seasons, the Thunder were 30-35 SU (straight up), 29-35-1 ATS (against the spread) and 33-29-3 OVER/UNDER (he missed 55 games in the 2014-15 season with injury). Just this past season he only missed 10 games and the Thunder were 3-7 SU, 3-7 ATS and 5-5 OVER/UNDER. 

    With Durant in the lineup over the last two seasons, the Thunder were 81-36 SU, 56-57-4 ATS and 54-63 OVER/UNDER. That still didn’t make them a profitable bet but they were 49.5 percent against the spread with Durant in the lineup compared to 46.1 percent with him sidelined. 

    What’s intriguing is that the totals seem to be a little inflated with Durant in the lineup. The UNDER hit at 53.8 percent with Durant in the lineup compared to 46.7 percent with him out. 

    Might be something to watch next year along with inflated lines. I don’t think Durant can still be worth four or 4.5 points to the spread with all the talent running around for the Warriors. 

    I do think the recreational bettor is going to be uncomfortable betting against the Warriors though so there may be some value in the early going. We’ll see.   

  10. 3 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

    The only betting line that Tech hasn't demolished by double digits in this tournament has been against NKU in the first round. Tech has completely wiped its ass with Vegas betting lines the whole tournament but I guess you could go with that if you like.

    Is your point that I should take the word of you and the mathematically challenged Slorch regarding how many points Owens is worth because Tech has handily covered 5 games so far in the tournament?

  11. Just now, slorch said:

    It would be a 5 point swing, first of all, because there are two teams; and if he was healthy I'd wager Tech would be favored.

    All that being said, the betting line is hardly the barometer of a player's impact.  The story has yet to be told.

    Ignore people have watched Tech all season, though.   WTF do we know?

    What?  UVA is a 1 point favorite.  If Owens is worth 10 points as you said, that would move the line to Tech -9.  That's 10 points between the two teams.  

    And yes, in general, I trust betting markets much more than fans who have watched a bunch of games.

  12. 3 hours ago, slorch said:

    He could be worth a 10 point swing when you consider his rim protection/ shot blocker on defense.

     

    3 minutes ago, CDAK said:

     

    Meant to quote these as well. Owens is not worth 10 points.  That's nuts.

     

    2 minutes ago, slorch said:

    Cool.  because that's not what i said.  and YES, he absolutely is worth a 10 point swing between teams.

    I am not sure what I am misinterpreting.  You think he COULD be worth 10 points.  He's not worth 10 points.  The line is not moving anywhere close to 10 points based on the health of Owens.

  13. 2 hours ago, slorch said:

    He could be worth a 10 point swing when you consider his rim protection/ shot blocker on defense. He’s a solid contributor on offense, but to your point not a true difference maker to that tune of the final score for Tech. B

     

    2 hours ago, Doyle Hargreaves said:

    This is spot on. He is the single season record holder shot blocker in program history. Knocked down some big shots Saturday. Made 3 key blocks. Made sparty struggle overall on shot selection. If he is limited, it changes the whole game. 

    Meant to quote these as well. Owens is not worth 10 points.  That's nuts.

  14. 1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

    Yeah this is a crazy bad take. MSU was entirely unable to score inside when Owens was in the game. They started posting up immediately and scoring steadily down low after he got hurt. Tech probably wins that game by 15+ if he played his full minutes.

    You are way overvaluing individual players. I know this is not a perfect comparison but Kevin Durant is worth 3.5-4 points in an NBA game in Vegas.   https://www.oddsshark.com/nba/what-kevin-durant-worth-point-spread  And there are a lot more points scored in the NBA than college.  3.5-4 points out of 200 is less impact than 3.5-4 points out of 120.

    UVA is a 1 point favorite in Vegas.  You think if Tariq Owens was healthy, Tech would be a 9 point favorite?  

  15. 6 hours ago, RPM said:

    Latinx (la-TEEN-ex) (/ləˈtiːnɛks, læ-/) is a gender-neutral term sometimes used in lieu of Latino or Latina (referencing Latin American cultural or racial identity). The plural is Latinxs.

    Is the pronunciation above saying to pronounce it latinks?  I just assumed it was Latin_X.  Sorry, I must have missed the day in school where we learned how to read pronunciation spellings.

  16. 2 hours ago, CHEF DIESEL said:

    One of the key features of the upper class back in the day is they actually BELIEVED in their role in society. They may have been ruthless and greedy, but they also gave back to society in the form of libraries, museums, and donations to causes. They felt a pride in their status and passed it along to their kids. They didn't always succeed in raising a new generation that was worth a shit, but at least they didn't just spend all their cash on indulging themselves and were smart enough to be modest and discreet.  Which is not what we have going on here.

    However, alas, the adults of this generation have no such pride or discretion. They are dumb enough to go humble brag about it after mommy shelled out thousands to get you there. 

    Heh...they call them "new money" for a reason.

    Do you have any data for that assertion?  Anecdotally, it seems like many of the well-known billionaires have become large philanthropists, maybe with the notable exception of Bezos.  

    Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Oprah, Ken Langone, John Paulson, etc.

  17. On 2/19/2019 at 2:39 PM, kevwun said:

    I've started A History of the Arab Peoples.  It's a bit dry so far.  I'm hoping it gets better.

    You could try some Arab fiction.  I'm reading The Televangelist by Ibrahim Essa right now.  I think it's my first foray into Arab fiction.  I'm about halfway through and am really enjoying it.  It's about a popular sheikh in Cairo with a television show (hence the title) who gets involved in two government issues, one of which is a young man connected to the President's son through marriage who attempts to convert to Christianity (Coptic Orthodox).  The author delves succinctly and interestingly into a lot of Arab and Egyptian history, particularly religious history.  It's assuredly not a replacement for a lengthy history of the Arab people, but it's a good read and I recommend it.

×
×
  • Create New...